[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 38 (Tuesday, February 28, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S514-S515]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                          Judicial Nominations

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, in keeping with their promise to 
fundamentally transform the country, Joe Biden and the Democrats have 
done everything in their power to fundamentally transform the Federal 
judiciary. As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I have been able to 
interact with many of these nominees, and I have to say that I fully 
believe the American people deserve better.
  There was Charnelle Bjelkengren, Joe Biden's nominee to the Eastern 
District of Washington. Now, she couldn't tell the committee what 
article II of the Constitution says, but I expect my Democratic 
colleagues will send her nomination to the floor this Thursday.
  Dale Ho, who received the unanimous support of committee Democrats to 
serve in the Southern District of New York, referred to himself as a 
``wild-eyed sort of leftist'' and disparaged members of the committee 
on Twitter.
  Before she was nominated to serve on the Fourth Circuit, DeAndrea 
Benjamin released multiple people on bond who went on to commit more 
violent crimes. She, too, received the unanimous support of committee 
Democrats.
  Todd Edelman, who is well on his way to becoming a district judge 
here in the District of Columbia, also displayed soft-on-crime 
tendencies. He released a known criminal who then went on to 
participate in the murder of a child. He received yet another vote of 
unanimous support from committee Democrats.
  Marian Gaston, nominee to the Southern District of California, wrote 
a policy paper arguing that we should do away with residence 
restrictions for convicted child sex offenders.
  Orelia Merchant, nominee to the Eastern District of New York, 
couldn't define ``originalism.''
  This is an embarrassment, and it gets even worse, and it gets even 
worse when you look at the lack of qualification of the nominees the 
Democrats are sending for lifetime appointments to the Federal bench.
  Few nominations have been as disturbing as President Biden's 
elevation of Michael Delaney to the First Circuit. To date, Mr. 
Delaney's most noteworthy contribution to his profession is the vicious 
intimidation of an underage sexual assault survivor who dared to speak 
out against one of his clients.
  My colleagues on the Judiciary Committee already know the story of 
what Mr. Delaney did to Chessy Prout and her family, but I am going to 
repeat it here for my colleagues who are unfamiliar with this nominee's 
background. You should vote against this nominee, and here is why.
  When she was a freshman at the elite St. Paul's Boarding School, 
Chessy Prout was sexually assaulted by an older student participating 
in ``senior salute.'' This was a campus-wide competition that 
encouraged senior men to commit statutory rape.
  The perpetrator was ultimately found guilty of misdemeanor statutory 
rape, but the Prouts wanted their day in court with a civil suit. They 
had evidence that the powers that be at St. Paul's knew about this sick 
tradition.
  Mr. Delaney represented the school, and he decided he was going to 
play hardball. He moved to have Chessy, who was a minor child, named 
publicly in a lawsuit that had garnered national attention. That is 
right--let's publicly name this child in a lawsuit that had garnered 
national attention.
  I would ask my colleagues, does that sound like an action that 
someone who is going to sit on the Federal bench should be taking?
  Mr. Delaney knew that if he exposed Chessy as Jane Doe, he would put 
her at risk of bullying, social isolation, and physical harm. He knew 
that, but it was worth it to him because it meant he could silence 
Chessy Prout, and he could go on and protect an elite private school 
that had a sick tradition. Their leadership knew about that sick 
tradition.
  Most of my Republican colleagues came to Mr. Delaney's confirmation 
hearing, and they questioned him about this action. Only two of my 
Democratic colleagues chose to attend the hearing and to question him. 
Why? Because even my friends on the other side of the aisle who have 
rubberstamped each of President Biden's unqualified nominees, no matter 
how controversial they were, they knew this guy, Mr. Delaney, is unfit 
to sit on the bench.
  I would say two things to Chairman Durbin and the rest of my 
Democratic colleagues on the Judiciary Committee. First, even a cursory 
glance at this nominee's record should have landed his file in the 
trash can. You don't do this. You do not do this to minor children. But 
now that his nomination is facing a vote, you need look no further into 
Mr. Delaney's record than what has already been laid out before us. He 
harassed and threatened a 15-year-old little girl who survived a sexual 
assault and who was just trying to protect other young women at that 
school from that same fate. That should be enough for every single 
member on the Judiciary Committee to oppose this nomination. It should 
be enough for every Member of this Chamber to oppose his nomination and 
confirmation.
  Confirming Mr. Delaney would send a chilling message--a chilling 
message--to victims of sexual assault. No victim would ever be able to 
walk into his courtroom and feel that they would be treated fairly 
under the law after seeing the way he treated Chessy Prout.
  I wanted to let Chessy speak for herself in a letter she submitted to 
the Judiciary Committee. My concern is that many of my colleagues in 
this Chamber have not seen this letter. Indeed, I am concerned that 
Members of the Democratic caucus who did not attend the

[[Page S515]]

hearing are unaware of this letter. So I will allow her to speak.
  I quote:

       If Michael Delaney is confirmed--if an attorney who 
     brazenly intimidated a minor victim of sexual assault is 
     given the distinct privilege to serve as a judge for the 
     United States Court of Appeals--YOU--

  Meaning every single one of you who would vote for him--

     --are telling victims and survivors that you not only approve 
     of victim intimidation tactics, you reward their enactors 
     with one of the highest legal appointments in the state of 
     Massachusetts.
       I expressed my concerns to . . . the Department of Justice 
     when Michael Delaney was first nominated in April of 2022, 
     and today I am urging you to vote ``NO'' to Michael Delaney's 
     nomination.

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Chessy's full letter be 
printed in the Record alongside my remarks.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

     To: Senate Judiciary Committee
     From: Chessy Prout
       Dear Senators: My name is Chessy Prout, and I'm writing 
     about President Biden's nomination of Michael A. Delaney to 
     the US Court of Appeals in Boston. I am asking that you vote 
     ``NO'' to his nomination. Michael Delaney is not ethically 
     qualified to sit on the bench.
       I believe the justice system needs to serve all involved in 
     court proceedings--the victim/complainant and the defendant/
     institution. A lawyer who practices victim intimidation is 
     doing nothing for the greater good of the community; he 
     stands in the way of justice and furthermore keeps his 
     community in a toxic cycle of harm and silence.
       I was the State of New Hampshire's primary witness in their 
     case against Owen Labrie in 2015. When I was fifteen years 
     old in 2014, I was sexually assaulted by Owen Labrie during a 
     spring rite of passage at St. Paul's School in Concord, New 
     Hampshire called the ``senior salute'', a ritual involving 
     upperclassmen soliciting sexual favors from underclassmen 
     before graduation. The terminology ``Senior Salute'' was 
     published in the school newspaper (a documented exhibit in 
     the trial), the Rector Michael Hirschfeld's wife received a 
     ``senior salute'' by email from a student, and the Rector 
     Michael Hirschfeld was the faculty advisor for a handbook 
     outlining colloquial terms among the student body, including 
     a definition of the ``senior salute.''
       During the trial of the State's case in 2015, multiple St. 
     Paul's School students were called to testify to Labrie's 
     premeditation. The day of the students' scheduled testimony, 
     I walked into the Merrimack Courthouse through the back doors 
     with a bailiff to avoid the news cameras at the front of the 
     courthouse (I was a minor and Jane Doe in the case.) In a 
     conference room on the first floor by the back door entrance 
     I saw my former classmates, those who were scheduled to 
     testify and some who were mere spectators, speaking with 
     Michael Delaney. My father, Alexander Prout, and the director 
     of public affairs for the New Hampshire Coalition Against 
     Domestic and Sexual Violence, Amanda Grady Sexton, also 
     witnessed the group assembled in the conference room. We 
     notified state prosecutor Catherine Ruffle of what we saw.
       When the students took to the stand, the pre-trial get-
     together Michael Delaney was involved in and seemingly 
     coordinated on behalf of St. Paul's School began to make 
     sense. The students had a new, carefully worded response when 
     defining the ``senior salute'' to the jury, and all denied 
     the school had any knowledge of the insidious nature of the 
     ritual. From the scene that I witnessed in the courthouse 
     conference room with the students and Michael Delaney to the 
     new, stilted, coordinated definitions of the students 
     testifying, I believe Michael Delaney tampered with the 
     witnesses on behalf of his client, St. Paul's School.
       When I learned the extent to which St. Paul's School knew 
     of my perpetrator's prior abuse, my family and I sued the 
     school in 2016. Michael Delaney, in response to our suit and 
     as St. Paul's School's counsel, submitted a motion to strip 
     my anonymity. I refused to allow this textbook tactic of 
     victim intimidation to silence me, so I came forward publicly 
     with my name and my story in an attempt to use my voice to 
     shed light on the experience of a teenaged survivor of sexual 
     assault.
       I remember so clearly reading Michael Delaney's motion 
     front to back when I came home from my new high school one 
     day, processing what it meant, and then defiantly stating to 
     my parents that after everything I'd been dragged through 
     (from anonymous death and rape threats on the internet to the 
     betrayal of and backlash from my closest friends at St. 
     Paul's School), I wasn't going to let Michael Delaney's dirty 
     tactics bully me, then 16, into shame and silence.
       When survivors of sexual harassment, assault, and abuse 
     come forward to seek some semblance of justice, there is an 
     army of attorneys with a tried and true playbook of tactics 
     to discredit, pressure, and manipulate survivors and victims 
     into silence. What these attorneys don't seem to realize is 
     that most survivors are simply seeking an acknowledgement of 
     harm and an actionable plan to make their community a safer 
     place.
       Every 68 seconds, an American is sexually assaulted; every 
     nine minutes, that victim is a child. According to the USDOJ, 
     63% of sexual assaults are not reported to the police. Of the 
     37% who do report, only 2.5% get some form of justice. This 
     staggering statistic should give everyone, especially those 
     in the legal field, pause.
       If Michael Delaney is confirmed--if an attorney who 
     brazenly intimidated a minor victim of sexual assault is 
     given the distinct privilege to serve as a judge for the 
     United States Court of Appeals--YOU are telling victims and 
     survivors that you not only approve of victim intimidation 
     tactics, you reward their enactors with one of the highest 
     legal appointments in the state of Massachusetts.
       I expressed my concerns to Attorney from the Department of 
     Justice when Michael Delaney was first nominated in April 
     2022, and today I am urging you to vote ``NO'' to Michael 
     Delaney's nomination.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Chessy Prout.

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. The White House knew that Mr. Delaney was unfit to 
serve, but they nominated him anyway.
  For the sake of young men and women around this country who are 
survivors of sexual assault, I urge President Biden to withdraw Michael 
Delaney's nomination, and I call on my Democratic colleagues to urge 
the White House to withdraw this nomination. If they do not withdraw 
this nomination of a man who intimidated a minor child, exposing a 
minor child, who is unfit to serve--I urge you to vote no if the White 
House does not pull this nomination.